Re: Bug#322359: gnats: FTBFS: unpacking fails - Please do not use a version number ending with '-0'
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 12:17:13PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 10:08:34AM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> > Andreas Jochens <aj@andaco.de> wrote:
> > > Policy seems to require that the numbers start with '-1'.
> >
> > Require is hardly true. If I recall correctly, and perhaps I'm a
> > geezer in this respect, policy recommends that debian package numbers
> > start with -1. It doesn't require that they do. In fact, tools have
> > been designed to accommodate both 0 and 1 as the initial version. We
> > do live in a computer world where ordinal numbers are a rule, not an
> > exception.
> >
> > If the debian-policy makers enforce the no "-0" rule, I will upload a
> > new version. But until I'm told otherwise, I'll continue to use "-0"
> > as my initial package versions.
>
> This is not debian-policy but developers-reference
> (5.11.2. NMU version numbering) that mandate that
> -0.1 is reserved from 'new upstream version in NMU'. This way the
> maintainer can use -1 independently of whether a -0.1 release occurred.
>
> I don't see much point in dpkg rejecting -0, since it is a Debian
> specific practice. If -0 must be rejected then it should be done by
> dak, not dpkg (imho).
just for the record: the fact that dpkg-dev currently can't unpack
such packages is due to a bug, not due to an intentional change...
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
Reply to: